Amit Varma has an interesting article today in which he calls for a rethink on doping in sports, be it through genetic modifications or other means. While I may not agree with everything he says, some thought will have to be given to the arguments he makes over the next few decades as the era of ‘designer’ sportsmen (and ‘designer’ human beings, in general) dawns. One can argue for or against his claim such modifications actually make for a level playing field but there is no argueing that for better or for worse, this genetic revolution is coming and will impact the way we lead our lives much more than that caused by the industrial revolution in the 19th century or even the technology and physics revolutions in the 20th century.
Without going into too much details – because the topic is too broad and controversial (the temptations of eugenics, anyone?) for me to make minor points for or against it here – let me express one concern I have, specific to sports. Does letting genetic tailoring of athletic prowess provide an unfair advantage to those with money and the privilege to get these so-called upgrades on their systems. Surely there is some of this disadvantage today – in some sports more than others - but far too often we hear of athletes from families with limited means going on to achieve a lot through their natural talents and hard work. A genetically modified world undoubtedly will stand to leave such people behind.
In any case, I will leave you with an interesting quote that I gleaned from an earlier article Amit wrote some years back at the popular cricket site, Cricinfo. This is excerpted from Francis Fukuyama's book Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the Biotechnology Revolution, an alleged (alleged because I have not read it - not saying it ain't so) "polemic against genetic engineering":
The deepest fear that people express about technology is ... that, in the end, biotechnology will cause us in some way to lose our humanity - that is, some essential quality that has always underpinned our sense of who we are and where we are going, despite all of the evident changes that have taken place in the human condition through the course of history. Worse yet, we might make this change on the without recognizing that we had lost something of great value. We might thus emerge on the other side of a great divide between human and post-human history and not even see that the watershed had been breached because we lost sight of what that essence was.
In addition to the afore-mentioned ‘polemic’ by Fukuyama, read the book I borrowed the title of this post from:
Citizen Cyborg: Why Democratic Societies Must Respond to the Redesigned Human of the Future by James Hughes
And couple books that take the pro-genetic-modifications stance:
Redesigning Humans: Our Inevitable Genetic Future by Gregory Stock
More Than Human: Embracing the Promise of Biological Enhancement by Ramez Naam
Also: Remaking Eden by Lee M. Silver and Enhancing Human Traits: Ethical and Social Implications by Erik Parens (editor)
and last but not least - an interesting debate between the two schools of thought.
No comments:
Post a Comment